Toggle sidebar

The Advanced Stats Thread Episode VI: RIP To Our Databases

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn't even know this existed yet. I was reading on some forums about stuff similar though. Still rocky with making my own things (smallish mistakes and little errors) but I will give this a try and familiarize hopefully today
 
Eh, I'm fine with this for now

If it turns out to be a bad move down the line, then I'll complain about it
 


Oh, pardon me, Richards obviously very qualified. He's 'inquisitive'.

Oscar Lindberg said:
Eh, I'm fine with this for now

If it turns out to be a bad move down the line, then I'll complain about it
Click to expand...

Not sure how hiring unqualified people into a front-office isn't already a bad move, but this is something that's always been a pet peeve of mine. Just me, I guess.
 
Irishguy42 said:
Yes, let's immediately **** on this move while we know even less than they do.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I'm doing. I'm mad the Rangers are hiring Leetch and Richards over me or any other HF poster. Totally. (assuming this is what you meant by "while we know even less than they do". If it's not, please feel free to correct me).

My beef isn't with this move. It's with the endless hiring of former players. It's dumb. They're not qualified. You won't convince me that just because you played hockey in the NHL, and "asked questions about how FO's are run" qualifies you to have a hand in making decisions for this franchise.

There are plenty of more qualified people out there to do that who don't get a look because they never played in the NHL.

The revolving NHL door is garbage. Garbage in, garbage out, garbage back in. A coach gets fired from one team and it's always: "He won't be unemployed for long". Maybe he should be.
 
Last edited:
silverfish said:
Yes, that's what I'm doing. I'm mad the Rangers are hiring Leetch and Richards over me or any other HF poster. Totally. (assuming this is what you meant by "while we know even less than they do". If it's not, please feel free to correct me).

My beef isn't with this move. It's with the endless hiring of former players. It's dumb. They're not qualified. You won't convince me that just because you played hockey in the NHL, and "asked questions about how FO's are run" qualifies you to have a hand in making decisions for this franchise.

There are plenty of more qualified people out there to do that who don't get a look because they never played in the NHL.

The revolving NHL door is garbage. Garbage in, garbage out, garbage back in. A coach gets fired from one team and it's always: "He won't be unemployed for long". Maybe he should be.
Click to expand...

This doesn't seem like the normal garbage "thanks for being a great player for us through the years, here's a cushy job."

Those usually involve players who have shown little interest in the past about the front office, whereas it seems like Richards has actively pursued learning and whatnot over the course of his playing career.

Now Leetch, on the other hand, I didn't expect. I thought, if anything, he would have continued on the path he was already pseudo-forging with MSG Networks.

I don't like the mass recycling of players into front offices, but I think with some players, it works. I happen to think Richards will work at least better than other options.

But this is getting OT...
 
Irishguy42 said:
This doesn't seem like the normal garbage "thanks for being a great player for us through the years, here's a cushy job."

Those usually involve players who have shown little interest in the past about the front office, whereas it seems like Richards has actively pursued learning and whatnot over the course of his playing career.

Now Leetch, on the other hand, I didn't expect. I thought, if anything, he would have continued on the path he was already pseudo-forging with MSG Networks.

I don't like the mass recycling of players into front offices, but I think with some players, it works. I happen to think Richards will work at least better than other options.

But this is getting OT...
Click to expand...

It's not entirely OT, because the more qualified people, IMO, are the people diving into the game from a different POV (read: analytics). You continue recycling former players into the mix, and you get the same ****. Nothing changes.

I'm thrilled we have a GM that isn't blinded by his playing days.
 
Do we even know what those jobs will entail and if they're even at all linked to analytics? Beaver has always been a really smart hockey mind
 
silverfish said:
It's not entirely OT, because the more qualified people, IMO, are the people diving into the game from a different POV (read: analytics). You continue recycling former players into the mix, and you get the same ****. Nothing changes.

I'm thrilled we have a GM that isn't blinded by his playing days.
Click to expand...

It will entirely depend on how players like Leetch and Richards, or any former player really, looks at analytics.

Just because they are a former player doesn't mean they're against analytics or against looking at the game from a different perspective.

But it's hard to gauge that, I think. Each person is different and we simply aren't privy to that kind of stuff regularly.

In a theoretical scenario: For an advisor role, like the ones I guess Leetch and Richards are getting, who would you rather hire?

  • Former player who doesn't like analytics
  • Former player who is open using analytics and experience together
  • Non-pro player who only has analytics in their advising arsenal

You take the second option. The guy who is willing to use all tools. No contest there. You really can't get by on experience or analytics alone.

But like I said, we don't know if that's what we're getting. Are we getting a former player who says "**** that analytics BS" or are we getting a former player who says "We can use analytics as well as the personal experience I learned from being in the NHL for 10+ years. There is some overlap here."
 
Last edited:
Mac n Gs said:
Do we even know what those jobs will entail and if they're even at all linked to analytics? Beaver has always been a really smart hockey mind
Click to expand...

Says who?

Irishguy42 said:
It will entirely depend on how players like Leetch and Richards, or any former player really, looks at analytics.

Just because they are a former player doesn't mean they're against analytics or against looking at the game from a different perspective.

But it's hard to gauge that, I think. Each person is different and we simply aren't privy to that kind of stuff regularly.

In a theoretical scenario: For an advisor role, like the ones I guess Leetch and Richards are getting, who would you rather hire?

  • Former player who doesn't like analytics
  • Former player who is open using analytics and experience together
  • Non-pro player who only has analytics in their advising arsenal

You take the second option. The guy who is willing to use all tools. No contest there. You can't get by on experience or analytics alone.

But like I said, we don't know if that's what we're getting. Are we getting a former player who says "**** that analytics BS" or are we getting a former player who says "We can use analytics as well as the personal experience I learned from being in the NHL for 10+ years. There is some overlap here."
Click to expand...

This is missing the point. They aren't qualified. They've spent 0 time in any function in any front office at any level.

I'm not against hiring former players specifically because they're former players. I'm against hiring former players because their experience is that they've played in the NHL.

Richards and Leetch want to work in an FO? Go work in the OHL for a few years. Gain your experience. Prove you can do it. Instead, they get shoehorned in because they've played in the league. I think that's dumb.
 
silverfish said:
This is missing the point. They aren't qualified. They've spent 0 time in any function in any front office at any level.

I'm not against hiring former players specifically because they're former players. I'm against hiring former players because their experience is that they've played in the NHL.

Richards and Leetch want to work in an FO? Go work in the OHL for a few years. Gain your experience. Prove you can do it. Instead, they get shoehorned in because they've played in the league. I think that's dumb.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
To be fair, "hockey operations advisors" is basically a made up job title used to please former players lol.
 
silverfish said:
Says who?



This is missing the point. They aren't qualified. They've spent 0 time in any function in any front office at any level.

I'm not against hiring former players specifically because they're former players. I'm against hiring former players because their experience is that they've played in the NHL.

Richards and Leetch want to work in an FO? Go work in the OHL for a few years. Gain your experience. Prove you can do it. Instead, they get shoehorned in because they've played in the league. I think that's dumb.
Click to expand...

It's my general impression from listening to him talk about hockey through the countless interviews he's done and other plays speaking about him.

I also agree with your second point, FWIW. There's still a long way to go with dealing with the old boy's club mentality in NHL front offices
 
Mac n Gs said:
It's my general impression from listening to him talk about hockey through the countless interviews he's done and other plays speaking about him.

I also agree with your second point, FWIW. There's still a long way to go with dealing with the old boy's club mentality in NHL front offices
Click to expand...

Good players don't necessarily make good coaches/FO employees, though ;) They also don't necessarily make bad ones. I did the research on this once, but posted it on my old, defunct blog, and now I don't have it.

Yes, the old boy's club mentality is bull****, and it's the reason why Athanasiou is going to play in the KHL this year.
 
silverfish said:
Good players don't necessarily make good coaches/FO employees, though ;) They also don't necessarily make bad ones. I did the research on this once, but posted it on my old, defunct blog, and now I don't have it.

Yes, the old boy's club mentality is bull****, and it's the reason why Athanasiou is going to play in the KHL this year.
Click to expand...

Well duh, our current coach was a giant plug at the professional level :sarcasm:

Can you elaborate more on your AA opinion? Did you mean the awful contracts Holland has given out?
 
Mac n Gs said:
Well duh, our current coach was a giant plug at the professional level :sarcasm:

Can you elaborate more on your AA opinion? Did you mean the awful contracts Holland has given out?
Click to expand...

Offer sheets don't exist because NHL GMs are too afraid to burn bridges. These GMs are a very tight-knit community.

(To inch this sort of back on topic)

Matt Cane's model has Athanasiou as a $1.91m AAV player. It's an interesting evaluation, because the jump in compensation from 3rd rounder to 2nd rounder hits at $1.96m. I'd easily be willing to part with that 2nd rounder to get AA here, so it's not a deterrent. But, I do wonder if DET is more likely to match an offer sheet that has only 3rd round compensation, and perhaps let AA walk if they do get that 2nd round.
 
silverfish said:
Offer sheets don't exist because NHL GMs are too afraid to burn bridges. These GMs are a very tight-knit community.

(To inch this sort of back on topic)

Matt Cane's model has Athanasiou as a $1.91m AAV player. It's an interesting evaluation, because the jump in compensation from 3rd rounder to 2nd rounder hits at $1.96m. I'd easily be willing to part with that 2nd rounder to get AA here, so it's not a deterrent. But, I do wonder if DET is more likely to match an offer sheet that has only 3rd round compensation, and perhaps let AA walk if they do get that 2nd round.
Click to expand...

Ah, that's fair. Yeah, I agree regarding offer sheets since they'd make the sport so much more interesting. I mean look at the NBA and how crazy their offseason was. Even the NFL made it more hectic by adding the bigger cut day, resulting in more player movement.
 


I don't mind having them work with prospects and player development. I find their involvement with hockey-related decisions concerning though.
 
It's not a big deal. These "advisors" rarely do anything of substance.

It's a glorified internship so that they may be considered for positions of substance in the future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom